It's very difficult to take Boris Johnson seriously on any level for a great many people. Even if he was expertly advised and followed the advice many would wan

It's very difficult to take Boris Johnson seriously on any level for a great many people. Even if he was expertly advised and followed the advice many would want to see strong evidence that this occurred before assuming it was just another random whim divorced from reality in support of a particular pose that is difficult for outsiders to understand. I'm not saying that's a fair analysis and it probably isn't but it is a very widely held one. I know the UK is pretending the herd immunity strategy of encouraging everyone to go to football games because they only infect 5 people actually never happened and was never policy despite the press conferences etc. It seems pretty unlikely to me that people from across the political ideology spectrum got that idea because of a unified Johnson smear. -------- Aside it is possible it's a unified smear, of course. We've seen unified smears (nobly or ignobly motivated) of Sanders, Trump and Corbyn to name just 3. (And do you like /any/ of those politicians? A smear is still a smear when you dislike them with vigor.) It's harder to see it here. Johnson's charm works about as well outside of the UK as Trump's in the big coastal cities and Europe. [1] I have a strong visceral dislike for Trump. The man makes my blood boil and reason hard to cling to. Yet the Russian bounties story in Afghanistan is one place I can look at a man I utterly loathe and note there was a unified smear taking place in the media. I'd be interested if someone has a similar case concerning Johnson. There don't seem to be many consequences for reporting, publishing and repeating utter falsehoods which makes sensible, reasoned, policy analysis by those of us who merely want to vote in a sensible manner increasingly challenging.